The judge in the trial of married insurance businessman Mark Strong Sr. held two days of closed-door questioning of potential jurors before the state supreme court ordered the process opened to the public.
Jury selection was to resume this morning.
Jury selection stalled for more than three weeks after prosecutors appealed the dismissal of 46 invasion-of-privacy counts against Strong. Strong, who’s from Thomaston, still faces 13 other counts dealing with promotion of prostitution.
Strong and fitness instructor Alexis Wright, who ran the Zumba studio in the seaside community Kennebunk, have pleaded not guilty.
Prosecutors say Wright engaged in prostitution in the dance studio. She’ll be tried later.
Justice Nancy Mills has gone to great lengths to seat a jury despite intense news coverage generated by the prostitution scandal in Kennebunk, a town of about 10,000 residents known for its ocean beaches and old mansions. More than 140 potential jurors were called for the case, and each of them had to fill out a questionnaire.
The case has generated national and international headlines because of its location in a quiet seaside hamlet next to Kennebunkport, home of the Bush family’s Walker’s Point summer compound, and the scale of the prostitution alleged by prosecutors.
Police have said more than 150 people are suspected of being clients and many of them were videotaped without their knowledge. A lawyer who has seen a client list says it includes some prominent names. Those who’ve been charged include a former mayor, a high school hockey coach, a minister, a lawyer and a firefighter.
Strong said he helped Wright launch her Pura Vida dance-fitness studio in Kennebunk by co-signing for her lease and loaning money that was repaid in full. He said he didn’t know about allegations of prostitution.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less